[kenrexford]

Scoring: MP

---

You pass, West opens 1♥, partner overcalls 3♦, doubled as "negative," to you. Your call?

When answering, consider describing what the various alternatives would mean and what options, if any, are also in the ball park.

[han]

For me this is a clear 5D call, but I will discuss the alternatives from a theorectical point of view.

Clearly all calls by us should be diamond raises.

It makes sense to agree that 3NT shows a hand that is thinking about saccing in 5D, but I don't have this agreement and it is not my style. I'd rather bid 5D immediately and make them guess, accepting that this may be too much sometimes.

I do not play that 4D encourages partner to bid 5D either, although again it makes sense to play this. My LM pairs partner insisted that I wouldn't raise him as a passed hand when he preempted at favorable, but this is not my style. I think that bidding less than 5D here is just not enough.

Spade and club bids would be lead directional raises. For example with xxxx xx QJx AKxx I would bid 4C. I think that these will almost always be highcard raises so partner is allowed to bid more with a good fitting hand (some 2-1-6-4 shape for example).

6D is too much imo.

[Free]

Easy pass imo: this is a typical pressure situation (favorable, passed partner), don't punish partner for overbidding the hand!

[gwnn]

He can have a 6 carded suit can't he? 4♦ or 3NT, if the latter encourages a 5♦ call. Of course, this depends largely on our WJO philosophy.

[Codo]

UR white vers. red with a passed partner. What WJO philosophy do you expect?
I believe in 5-9 Diamonds, 0-15 HCPs.

So 5 ♦ is easy.

They do have hearts. I have two, pd at most 3, game is a good bet for them, even slam is possible. They sould make the last guess and I believe that the 5. level is the right height.

[Echognome]

I'm going to take the low road with 4♦. I think 5♦ will not give them any choices. They do not likely have a spade fit and I am going to make it difficult for them to find clubs. Of course, if they bid 5♣, I might have regretted not bidding 5♦ immediately. It's also clear that responder does not have primary heart support, so partner rates to have a card there. Even if it's Qx, his preempt may get him to make that card. I don't like my major suit holdings enough to bid to the maximum here. Give me a 4=1=4=4 or a 4=3=4=2 and I would bid 5♦ immediately.

[Fluffy]

3♠, if partner raises they have double fit. And if partner has singleton maybe works fine too.

[kfay]

I'm with Han. Give them last guess and jump to 5♦

[mikeh]

Either you save in 5♦ or you don't, and unless you play methods that allow partner input, it is your decision.

What you cannot do is bid anything below the 5 level and then decide whether to save, unless your bid explicitly involves partner. I once played that a transfer into partner's suit passed captaincy... if playing that, then 4♣ would be a transfer to 4♦, suggesting that partner consider bidding 5♦ with the appropriate hand (any 7321 with nothing outside would be a clear 5♦ call for him).

However, even if playing that method, I wouldn't use it here, since any 7222 is probably a great save and any hand with Axxxxx of diamonds and 3♥s rates to be good as well.

There are hands on which one passes even with a good fit, because one does not want to tip off the opps. But this is not such a hand.

So for me the only question is 5♣, lead direct, or 5♦.

I'm worried that LHO has a diamond void and can make a cheap cue... but I suspect that he cannot afford to, because he doesn't have a spade fit, and 5♦ will be dangerous when they are guessing as to what trump is.

I'm not worried about partner being confused: I'm a passed hand so lead-direct has to be the sensible meaning for 5♣.

I doubt that my club winner will go anywhere, but I think that getting the lead may help... and it may also keep the opps out of a heart slam when they have a club fit.... they will be worried that the slam will go down on a club lead and a ruff.....

That brings me to the last point: bidding 5♣ allows for a double, to show length, and maximizes the chances of them finding 6♣... 5♦ will usually bar clubs as trump..... and it is this factor that gets me to bid 5♦

If partner is 6322 with a doubleton ♥, then I go 800... but xxx xx AJxxxx xx is not a 3♦ call even white v red at mps. Mps calls for calculated insanity, not suicidal/fraticidal insanity. And they may take the push to their 650 anyway.

[pbleighton]

Quote

I'm with Han. Give them last guess and jump to 5D

Me too.

Pressure on, thinking cap off

Peter

[pclayton]

mikeh, on Sep 4 2007, 09:36 AM, said:

I once played that a transfer into partner's suit passed captaincy... if playing that, then 4♣ would be a transfer to 4♦, suggesting that partner consider bidding 5♦ with the appropriate hand (any 7321 with nothing outside would be a clear 5♦ call for him).

I prefer to play 3N as either to play or a semi-psyche / save suggestion. I'd love to play it undoubled (it happens against bad players) and if they double, I'll run to 4♦ which should convey to partner an interest in saving with the appropriate hand.

Calls like the suit below our are fitted / lead, which also asks for pard's opinion on saving.

[mikeh]

pclayton, on Sep 4 2007, 02:20 PM, said:

mikeh, on Sep 4 2007, 09:36 AM, said:

I once played that a transfer into partner's suit passed captaincy... if playing that, then 4♣ would be a transfer to 4♦, suggesting that partner consider bidding 5♦ with the appropriate hand (any 7321 with nothing outside would be a clear 5♦ call for him).

I prefer to play 3N as either to play or a semi-psyche / save suggestion. I'd love to play it undoubled (it happens against bad players) and if they double, I'll run to 4♦ which should convey to partner an interest in saving with the appropriate hand.

Calls like the suit below our are fitted / lead, which also asks for pard's opinion on saving.

I'd guess we all bid 3N against bad players, but I think it is flawed to bid this way against good opps... LHO can pass, can double or can bid.. and if LHO doubles, and you run, he is in a forcing pass situation, so you are really expanding their bidding space on a hand on which your teammates may be having to find their second calls at the 5 level.

Our scheme involved transfers into side suits as lead-direct (3♥ here would show spades, etc), 4♦ as 'I know what to do over 4major) and 4♣ as 'I don't know what to do over 4Major, but I expect them to bid it), with 3N as a semi-psyche...partner is expected to pass...and I would never psyche 3N if I wanted to consider 5♦, because I want to involve partner early when in doubt and jam early when not in doubt. 3N just gives too much room to good opps. I love it when opps insult me with 3N on these auctions

[whereagles]

I think you underestimate the possibilities of the save-suggesting 3NT, mikeh.. but ok. Each to its own.

[skjaeran]

I'd bid 4♦. This is a strong constructive (in context) bid in my methods. Partner will make our final decision now.

3NT would be a weak, somewhat distribuional call, inviting partner to save.

Partner's jump overcall after my pass is wide ranging. I'd not like to make a phantom save vs an upper range overcall.

[mikeh]

whereagles, on Sep 4 2007, 02:51 PM, said:

I think you underestimate the possibilities of the save-suggesting 3NT, mikeh.. but ok. Each to its own.

If 3N is save-suggesting, then by all means, bid it. I think that having a partner-involving raise is a great idea, and while 3N is not the best for the purpose (because it consumes so little space) it is better than nothing. My concern is that Phil said it is either to play or a semi-psyche. If it is involving partner, then you must alert the bid (which sort of does away with the idea that you may get to play there undoubled). If a partnership doesn't alert, and partner always bids, and chooses 4 or 5♦ according to hand, then in my view that partnership is cheating. I don't think (for a nano-second) that that was Phil's intention: he used the 3N then pull to 4♦ as involving partner, and that is simply, in my opinion, giving the opps far too much room.

[pclayton]

mikeh, on Sep 4 2007, 12:06 PM, said:

whereagles, on Sep 4 2007, 02:51 PM, said:

I think you underestimate the possibilities of the save-suggesting 3NT, mikeh.. but ok. Each to its own.

If 3N is save-suggesting, then by all means, bid it. I think that having a partner-involving raise is a great idea, and while 3N is not the best for the purpose (because it consumes so little space) it is better than nothing. My concern is that Phil said it is either to play or a semi-psyche. If it is involving partner, then you must alert the bid (which sort of does away with the idea that you may get to play there undoubled). If a partnership doesn't alert, and partner always bids, and chooses 4 or 5♦ according to hand, then in my view that partnership is cheating. I don't think (for a nano-second) that that was Phil's intention: he used the 3N then pull to 4♦ as involving partner, and that is simply, in my opinion, giving the opps far too much room.

If 3N is solely a save-suggest, pard shouldn't pass.

Sometimes we actually have a hand that wants to bid 3N however.

[ArtK78]

5♦. Clear, unambigous, put the opponents to the last guess.

This is not a difficult problem except perhaps in the post-mortem.

[kenrexford]

The results were not all that illuminating. Partner's 3♦ was a bit frisky and dodged 3NT by the opponents, which goes miserably set. An unfortunate gamble.

BTW -- 5♣ makes their way -- a few noticed that concern.

However, the theory was the thing, as to advancing. For my part, I thought the stand-out call was 4♣, both lead-assisting and cooperative at the same time, 4♦ a very close second, 5♦ third but distantly, and 5♣ misleading. I was curious as to the view here.

The actual player with these cards bid 5♦; his partner, who bid 3♦ (and may of course had a bias) thought that 4♣ or 4♦ was the question, not 5♣ or 5♦.